/sci/ - Science & Math

So, her's my original comment:
>>4342660
>the only species on earth that have knowledge of their own physical death
Not so sure about that.

>Elephants are the only species on Earth other than Homo sapiens sapiens and Neanderthals[32] known to have or have had any recognizable ritual around death. They show a keen interest in the bones of their own kind (even unrelated elephants that have died long ago). They are often seen gently investigating the bones with their trunks and feet and remaining very quiet. Sometimes elephants that are completely unrelated to the deceased will still visit their graves.[13] When an elephant is hurt, other elephants (even if they are unrelated) will aid them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant_intelligence#Death_ritual

In our arrogance we try to differentiate ourselves from other animals. In recent years we have humbled and started seeing that many behaviors we thought unique to us exist in many mammals.

Truth is any other mammal with a sufficiently developed brain is pretty much like us. Mammal because of the proper cortex is needed for thinking.

>>4342663
And that's especially interesting when you consider that primates are much closer to humans.

We see grieving about dead comrades in primate groups but we have no evidence of any ritualised behaviour while at the same time we have evidence for this in Elephants who are much further away from us on the evolutionary tree.

I don't think elephants will ever evolve to a technological civilization but the potential is visible.

>big elephant
Christian warrior preaching the word of the Holy Trinity
>baby elephant
OP

Yes goyim!

Reply to my divide and conquer thread, stupid goyim!
Just as planned!

hehehe

>>4342667
>In our arrogance we try to differentiate ourselves from other animals.
Strange, I never did. I fully embrace my omnivore nature and the relationship between other animals and humans. Maybe it's a christian thing. I as a Buddhist don't have much of a problem with humans being the same as all other living beings.

>>4342678
I can't stand Jews either. It's a problem with all abrahamic religions teaching unjustified superiority.

You lure them in as followers by telling them that they were somehow better than others.

>>4342679
You are an exception.
The human race has for thousands of years claimed they are superior to everything else, that gods created them with missions, that they can transcend death, and other stupid baseless shit like that.

>>4342701
We are superior to everything else. Prove me wrong

>>4342707
Your post was proof.

>>4342707
You can't fight AIDS.

>>4342710
The fact that I'm able to post is proof otherwise.

>>4342714
Ability to post doesn't mean your ideas aren't fucking dumb. Enjoy your false sense of superiority

>>4342716
When was the last time an elephant had an idea and communicated it?

>>4342701
>The human race has for thousands of years claimed they are superior to everything else,
But we are superior to everything else. I can't see any other animals making guns.
There is no equal on Earth yet we are animals. Deal with it.

>>4342707
the human being is the epitome of mediocrity.
we aren't strong, we aren't fast, we can't climb like other animals, we can't swim like other animals.
but this mediocrity is what makes us superior.
we don't have a natural habitat where we fit in perfectly. thats the reason why we formed the nature in such a way that it fits us.
the human had to develop its brain to make it happen. if we had a place suited for us, we wouldn't have to develop our brains that far.

>>4342720
When was the last time you understood "fuck off" in elephant speak?
Thought so.

>>4342720
>When was the last time an elephant had an idea and communicated it?
You never go full american protestant, dude!

And whites are superior to most every other race and this has very obviously been proven throughout history.

>>4342722
>the human being is the epitome of mediocrity.
You see, we have a brain to invent tools to protect us. That puts us at the top of the foodchain.
We have two hands to make tools and we have a brain.

That doesn't mean we stop being part of the animalkingdom.

>>4342732
Why do you start with Racism? In desperate need for arguments? I thought your bible bans lying.

>>4342692
I disagree, I think the real allure of, at least Christianity, is the idea that all people are equal and that the poor are worth something in the eyes of God. It was a religion that spread through the lower ranks more quickly than the higher ranks.

While the Bible does state that humans are superior to animals, I disagree that this is one of its main points. I also disagree that this is a major reason for people wanting to believe in the Christian religion.

A sense of superiority probably comes about *after* a person has been a Christian for a while, or perhaps in a person who has lived in a Christian environment and is very zealous. I do not think that a new believe will feel this way.

>>4342707
it really depends on what you think superior means

>>4342748
>It was a religion that spread through the lower ranks more quickly than the higher ranks.
Have you ever heard of the quran schools in Pakistan? The students there have to learn to recite their holy book without proper knowledge of the language it was written in. They learn to recite it without knowing the content, without knowing arabic.

That's what christians also did in Europe before the bible was translated from latin. Traditional catholic masses are still hold in latin without the audience understanding what is said.

With a stronghold on knowledge and a warm meal during winter times, the christian faith spread throughout Europe and from there to the new world.

Also the use as the state religion of the Roman Empire.

>>4342760
I meant early christianity, which is where the religion actually spread throughout europe. Christianity was the dominant religion in Europe faaaaaar before medieval times.

>>4342760
American Prots do the same today in Africa. They offer a warm meal, play the good samaritan in exchange for listening to their crap.

I too would sit through a bible session if I was halfstarved and they would promise me a warm meal afterwards. If I ever start a sick cult like abrahamic cults, I'd copy the strategy of Christianity. You can gather a whole army of dumb cattle with cheap meals.

>>4342773
>which is where the religion actually spread throughout europe.
Yeah. When a roman Emperor tried to save the Roman Empire by becoming christian and declaring Christianity the state religion.

The poor people story is just a myth. The Europeans didn't speak greek either.

>>4342671
I find it hard to imagine any other species gaining intelligence under the current regime- HUMAN.

>>4342781
there was a large level of christians in the Roman empire more than a hundred years before the Edict of Milan

Religious people will deny or ignore any information that conflicts with their dogma. They simply aren't interested in reality, or they wouldn't be religious in the first place.

>>4342790
They weren't Christians. The thousands of cults with similar beliefs were unified and called Christian.

>>4342797
indeed they were not christians like we call them today, but they all followed the teachings of Christ, who taught that the poor will be let into heaven, the meek shall inherit the earth, etc.

>>4342795
Because all your suffering, all your obedience to the authorities is justified when you are stupid enough to believe in an afterlife. Surely everything has a hgher meaning and you'll probably get a reward once you are dead, lol.

When you realize that you only have this one life, you get a whole new perspective on it. Suicide bombers and dying for your country are impossible when people realize reality. Judaism, Christianity and Islam remind me of those parasites that make snails expose themselves to birds to be eaten.

>>4342798
Can you provide any proof for your claim? At least I know two other cults who were only monotheistic and were incorporated into Christianity.

Christianity spread with the Roman Empire as a means to project power but not through the will of the poor people and modern protestantism is even worse than earlier Catholizism.

>>4342812
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Perpetua

well there's that lady. She was a noble though. Christian cults started out as a small thing, and then got bigger. As they spread, the Roman authorities did not like them, because they did not perform sacrifices to venerate the emperor, which were necessary in Roman law. So they were persecuted. This went on for a while, but Christianity never ended up being wiped out, it just spread further. The Romans stopped persecuting them wholesale, and then with Constantine they set it up as an official religion of Rome. Key word is *an*.

The idea that the Romans used Christianity to project power is one that I dispute.

What I'm also saying is that Christianity spread because of the way it treated the poor. It was a nice feel good religion for people, as opposed to the Greek and Roman gods who were total assholes. Jesus was a cool guy, and people liked this, so they converted.

>>4342808
are you saying that non-religious people are less likely to die for their beliefs?

>>4342821
>Jesus was a cool guy,
That I would dispute.

Just some jewish wannabe king who was killed by the authorities and later turned into a holy figure.

>>4342827
>less likely to die for their beliefs?
I am saying that they are less likely to die for something not in their own interest. I would die for the sake of my family, not for the sake of my government or for the sake of the bible.

>>4342833
it doesn't matter what kind of person jesus was. It was a hundred or more years after he died when christianity started picking up steam. What matters is that people believed that Jesus loved them and if they loved Jesus and worshiped him, that they would go to heaven. Also that Jesus did not care how much land you owned or money you had or anything else about your temporal reality. That was the real kicker, it was that jesus was an equal opportunity employer or worshipers.

>>4342837
what are your beliefs if not in your own interest? People can be zealous and dogmatic even if there is no spirituality involved. People can be intense about their beliefs even if there is no zealotry, dogma or spirituality.

>>4342838
>only belief in Jesus can save you
>only believers are truly good
No really, take religiontalk to >>>/x/

>>4342671
>I don't think elephants will ever evolve to a technological civilization but the potential is visible.
Their trunks are probably better than oppossable thumbs. It is even hypothesized that their great intellect compared to most other mammals has evolved due to their fine-motor skills their trunk allows them and the large brain-mass has evolved as a prerequisite for control of its complicated muscular system.

>>4342798
>but they all followed the teachings of Christ
Actually, the early christians followed the general guideline set by Jesus. But each sect had its own way of thinking.
Then Constantine came with the Edict of Milan, and added a load of bullshit to use the popularity of christianity as a political tool. And that's why christianity sucks.

Also, I am tired of people criticizing "religious people" by thinking that they're all christians. It's only the abrahamic religions that are so full of shit. And even among them, all the christian people I know just see the Bible as a general guideline for life, and none considers it to hold the ultimate, absolute truth. It's just that those annoying religious extremists are the loudest ones.
And when you look into eastern religions, shit changes a lot. Buddhist people don't care about the existence or non existence of any god. Hindus consider that perfect understanding of the world can only be achieved through mathematics. Japanese shintoist and japanese zen buddhists live in the same country, and there has never been any problem between them, since anyone is allowed to switch religion whenever he wants, as many times as he wishes it in his life. Zoroastrian see their creation myths as just adaptations of a higher truth, and if any of them is proven false, they're perfectly ok with changing it. Hell, even the Vatican officially aknowledged the theory of evolution and the big bang theory to be compatible with christianity.

>>4342838
Then why did Christianity save the castes in ancient Europe?

Belief is pretty retarded when your debtor only has to pay you back when you are dead.

>>4342846
>Their trunks are probably better than oppossable thumbs.
Yeah, come back when they have two trunks to hold a hammer and a nail at the same time.

>>4342821
That's just ecclesiastic canon. There is no objective historical records (like Roman administration records) of early Christianity outside christian scholarship.

>>4342848
do you mean the First Council of Nicaea? Constantine saw that Christianity was becoming very important in the Roman Empire, but also saw that it was tearing itself apart due to the separation of ideologies that you just mentioned. He called the council to decide on the Arian problem so that things would settle down, and thus the Empire would settle down.

I'm not sure what you mean by "added a bunch of bullshit"

>>4342850
"Christianity" did not, those in power did.

>>4342859
Those in power created Christianity.

>>4342853
Elephants with human intellect would build the pyramids more easily. Search in your heart... you know it to be true.

>>4342861
that's an interesting point, actually. In a discussion like this it becomes a problem to just say "Christianity." I'm not sure what I'm trying to argue anymore, other than that my original point was that people are attracted to Christianity because of its core beliefs that I've already mentioned. Not because Jesus went around telling people that they will be better than everyone if they believe that he was the son of god.

>>4342671
it's really quite fascinating to wonder what causes such behaviors

>>4342721
Stop waving that phallic object around. It ruins your intellectual profile.

>>4342722

> we don't have a natural habitat where we fit in perfectly.

Oh but we do. Evolved to be able to walk long distances in hot, dry climate. Savanna is our natural habitant.

>>4342898
Shhh, now. Adults are talking.

>>4342721
right, but we're also destroying the environment and thus are the means of our own demise

not exactly superior when you think about it that way

>>4342732
>germanics discovering writing at 500 A.D. after forced copypasta by Mediterranean olive-skinned master race
>civilization itself invented by semi-niggerish middle/near eastern kikes more than 5000 years ago
>anglosphere established only 600 years ago when the semi-romanized barbaric villains of british folk-tales (anglo-saxons) experienced cultural shock after constant pillaging of half the world through plain military supremacy and thanks to accidental invention of gunpoweder (that the chinks invented at least 500 years before them)

Sure is white revisionism in here...

>>4342902
Am I not masculine enough for this thread? Let me fix that...

How about now? Can I post too?

>>4342900

but there are good reasons we got the fuck out of the savanna

>>4342940
Because we didn't want to stay niggers for ever?

>>4342943

if you really want to you can go back and see how you like it

>>4342947
How do you explain safari then?

Oh wait... it's just white folks like the OP >>4342721
wanting to feel superior to dum beasts by ejaculating on them with their lethal metal substitudes.

Atheism is a Jew religion.

>>4342940
Just because we were more and more, so we needed more room to expand.
http://www.ted.com/talks/denis_dutton_a_darwinian_theory_of_beauty.html
Look at the moment he talks about the sceneries we like.

Dude, what if 0 was actually like following the bible with the 7 days(weeks?) crap, and then god went BACK IN TIME and put the fossils there?

>>4342898
>Stop waving that phallic object around. It ruins your intellectual profile.
That may be more of a problem of the modern selfproclaimed intellectual "elite" than mine.

ITT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory

>>4342904
>not exactly superior when you think about it that way
Given the same technology every other animal would destroy Earth without ever realizing the destruction caused could be avoided.

Mankind can and does understand that it isn't the best idea to dump waste where the fresh water comes from. In other words: "You don't take a shit in the kitchen."

We are superior. Take your newage hippiecrap and shove it up your behind.

humans are superior in terms of capability. Of course, that doesn't mean we're not part of the same group as animals. We are animals and show way too many similarities with animals.

While we are superior in many ways we're also the only species that has spent thousands of years destroying itself and wasting time doing stupid bull crap.

>>4343054
>We are animals and show way too many similarities with animals.
So you, personally feel superior to animals?

>While we are superior in many ways we're also the only species that has spent thousands of years destroying itself and wasting time doing stupid bull crap.
Oh God, I hate you.

>>4343065
Or more precisely you feel the need for some sort of spiritual evolution to Veganism and anti nuclear power?

>>4343065
Do I feel superior to most other animals? Yes. I can do a lot of things they can't, can manipulate my environment more than they can, and can know more than they can and apply it in more ways.

Don't understand why my last statement makes you hate random people. Heightened intelligence has its flaws. It allows room for ambiguity and combined with our nature, has made us to be the most destructive creatures on the planet. Am I wrong?

>>4343042
we know it's bad to dump poisons into the ocean... yet we do it anyways

as for your first sentence, you literally have no evidence to support that

what happened to
>Can you provide any proof for your claim?
???

it's not newage hippie crap, I'm just saying that we're superior in some aspects, yet not so much in others

I wonder how long it will be into the future until grieving for lost ones is seen as a primitive behavior.

>>4343079
>it's not newage hippie crap
Oh yes it is.
Anthropogenic climate change is a new doomsday religion.

>Can you provide any proof for your claim?
Mouse Utopia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z760XNy4VM

>>4343095
once corporations get legislation passed to not count it as a reason to miss work. and with changes in business, man adapts.

>>4343098
You feed into too much political propaganda.

>>4343095
Please conform to /sci/'s standard comment format whenever possible.

>grieving
>2012
>ISHYGDDT

>>4343099
Well without looking at it in a satirical view, I wonder seriously if it will ever become a primitive behavior. Though, your viewpoint could be completely non-satirical if you have a real dystopian view.

>>4343107
I thought that was /g/'s standard?

>>4343098
where the heck did anthropogenic climate come from? no one mentioned that in this thread. ever. can't counter an argument by associating it with something extreme and ridiculous. That's like me saying to your statement that man is superior and saying "nope. apple computers suck." destruction of the environment is bad. we are wiping out our resources. we will be our own demise.
We're running out of commercial fish.
We are running out of fresh water.
We are running out of available land.
We are running out of available farmland.
This was done by us. Overfishing, wasteful and excessive consumption, reckless pollution, and overuse of land leading to desertification. that's us destroying the environment.

>>4343095
>I wonder how long it will be into the future until grieving for lost ones is seen as a primitive behavior.

>You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
http://www.bible-knowledge.com/10-commandments/

>And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world
http://esv.scripturetext.com/revelation/12.htm

Ethical behaviour is not bound to religion. Why do you keep lying, Believers?

>>4343189
The post you responded to had nothing to do with religion.

>>4343194
>The post you responded to had nothing to do with religion.
I don't think so.

>>4343098
>Anthropogenic climate change is a new doomsday religion.

And all your arguments are invalid now. You can go back to /pol/ or /k/.

>>4343223
>And all your arguments are invalid now.
As if. But your comment is good to illustrate the way modern opinion making/forcing is achieved. :3

>>4343231
Yeah sure, pal. You used that evil "intellectual elite" part some posts ago.

I for one trust the scientific consensus and my uni-professors in my environmental resources studies school more than rants of conpiracy-theorist gunfreaks on the internet.

You can rant all you want about it. And yes appeal to authority motherfucker! Until you can give some valid evidence contradicting the consensus learn to deal with it.

>>4343215
Sorry Tim but not everybody's mindset is still wrapped up in esoteric religious babble. Sometimes people question humanity on a philosophical nature that does nothing but pry at their inner workings regardless of what pope johnny dicksuck said.

>>4343243
It was a satirical remark about a comment where some dumbass thought a gun was not eligible as an example for human superiority over all other animals.

I could use a spear or a bow if that's better in your opinion.

>>4343256
>thought a gun was not eligible as an example for human superiority over all other animals.

The fact that you chose a gun demonstrates more about your mindset and your dad than it does about the "intellectual elites".

You could choose an artifcial biosphere, a skyscraper a spacecraft or if these are too hippy liberal for you you could choose a nuclear bomb or a stealth fighter-jet.

But would you personally have access to a nuke, a tank or an interceptor? off course not, you had to choose a symbol of your personal empowerment and emasculation pretty much like the self-important bible-thumbers you suppossedly criticize do.

>>4343256
>thought a gun was not eligible as an example for human superiority over all other animals.

The fact that you chose a gun demonstrates more about your mindset and your dad than it does about the "intellectual elites".

You could choose an artifcial biosphere, a skyscraper a spacecraft or if these are too hippy liberal for you you could choose a nuclear bomb or a stealth fighter-jet.

But would you personally have access to a nuke, a tank or an interceptor? off course not, you had to choose a symbol of your personal empowerment and authority pretty much like the self-important bible-thumbers you suppossedly criticize do.

>>4343272
I like this guy's thoughts.

>>4343267
I used the first tool that came to mind. A highevolved tool for defensive and offensive use. Your problem being?

"Intellectuals" can't be allowed to own guns? Or what?

>your mindset and your dad
I hardy know my dad or his opinions.

>you had to choose a symbol of your personal empowerment and emasculation pretty much like the self-important bible-thumbers you suppossedly criticize do.
You have serious issues, friend! There are far too many social conventions you adopt and try to force on others or try to use as an argument in discussions where they simply don't belong.

>>4343272
Why did you delete your post?

>>4343273
>I like this guy's thoughts.
And majority makes right, huh?

>>4343280

>one man
>majority

Anyway...

Woo guns! Shooting stuff!
Boo faggot values that say we cant be violent!!!

>>4343283
>Boo faggot values that say we cant be violent!!!
A gun doesn't make violent. I don't even own a gun and my car is really small. One of these tiny european cars.

Is that "emasculate" enough to be allowed to post a gun?

>>4343290

Okay, a gun doesnt make you violent, but it implies a capacity and intent on violence.

I was more protesting that other fellow who was complaining when you used a weapon as an example.

To define something as superior, you need to define the criterion you are judging.

>>4343309

I agree with this man.

>>4343309
Position in the foodchain.

>>4343316

You look at what animals prey upon the creature in question, versus how many it preys upon. This must include a degree of regularity, too, since random flukes (a few people getting mauled by tigers each year out of several billion humans alive today) do not indicate regular predation.

Humans are at the top of the macroscopic food chain, in that regard. We eat just about everything, and nothing eats us with any degree of regularity (on a scale comparable to that found in other animals which are preyed upon in the natural kingdom).

So, yes. Using this model, humans are the superior species in the food chain.

>>4343316
>>4343322

First of all, what would motivate someone to argue that we are superior to begin with?

Second of all, what is the point of using the food chain as proper criteria?

# of animals preyed upon/# of animals that prey upon

This seems totally irrelevant to anything. Actually the whole question seems worthless, but if we are asking the question I cant imagine why we would use a food chain criteria.

>>4343328

Some people just like classifying things. Some questions have no purpose beyond simply providing a recorded/recordable answer. Personally, I don't think it matters, but any talk of superiority/inferiority needs to have it pointed out that a criterion is necessary. Superiority isn't an innate quality, it's a measure of a specific trait.

The reason I answered the food chain one, if you're curious, is because it provides an example of what I mean. Humanity is higher on the food chain than other animals.

>>4343340

I guess one of my criticisms of the food chain criteria is that it puts two dependent species in a ranked order.

Like, a species of predator might be suffering because it is destroying the ecosystem BECAUSE it is preying upon animals so vigorously. Likewise a species not preyed upon can wreck the balance of species.

>>4343344

The food chain is a rather simplistic way of view things, yes. A food pyramid is a more accurate concept, with a handful of apex predators at the top requiring the support of a considerably larger number of prey items at each step down.

>>4343277
>I used the first tool that came to mind
That's called freudian slip.

>>4342898
So, do you want guns to be shaped like a ball, or what?